Sick Around the World

Between this and climate change, you'd think no one in this country had anything above a third grade education.

Run, do not walk, to the nearest computer (I'm guessing you're already there, however) and watch the latest Frontline Doc, Sick Around the World. Whether you've seen Michael Moore's Sicko -- whether you've shunned it outright, whether you've celebrated it with fireworks -- Frontline's short film about Health Care systems around the globe should be required viewing for every registered American voter. And for all you Michael Moore haters, know this: Sicko is to Sick Around the World, as Three Ninjas is to Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. It's really not even worth comparing the two.

In the film, T.R. Reid travels to five countries -- England, Japan, Germany, Taiwan and Switzerland -- and weighs the pros and cons about their respective health care systems; including cost to patients, cost to providers, quality of care, efficiency, wait times, and government involvement. There are drawbacks in every system to be sure, but there are things to be learned from each one as well. And very rarely do people, especially poor people, slip between the cracks to fend for themselves.

This isn't rocket science. It's common sense. Our health care system is broken. It's way past the point of ideology (and if you read this blog, you know I'm a big fan of ideology). I don't care about concerns over market intrusion, individual responsibility or anecdotal health-service nightmares. All I care about is that people get sick, and they can't afford treatment. We as Americans spend too much money on medical care, and get too little service in return. Our current system is inefficient, and it lacks any semblance of a moral responsibility to assist those who need it most. In this arena, the free market has proven to be completely inept. We literally turn into gibbering idiots every time we try and argue that health care isn't a basic human right. And there, I said it. Health care is a basic human right. Finally, I'm a complete, flaming liberal.

But think about it. We provide citizens with police and fire protection, whether they can afford it or not. We give kids an education, no matter their family income. Are these institutions perfect? Hell, no. But our streets are policed, house fires don't turn into city blazes, and most voters know a thing or two about civics and the political system. If you don't care for what's offered, and you can afford rent-a-cops and private schools, go for it. But if you can't, there's at least something to fall back on.

Why should health care be any different?

There is no such thing as free universal health care. We'll all have to pay for it, in whatever way we can. But people are sick. And they can't get treatment. What else is there to understand?

The Future Is Now

ABC News Expands Foreign Bureaus (Washington Post)

Due to an explosion in hand-held digital technology, ABC News is opening seven new news bureaus overseas, to be staffed by only a single person equipped with a DV camera and laptop. The reporter/producers will shoot and edit their own pieces, with long-distance help from ABC News offices, sending in their work via broadband or satellite connections from Africa, Asia and the Middle East.

While this type of reporting has become a staple of blogs and independent journalists, it's the first I've heard of one of the major American news-broadcasters joining the fray. And it's good news, too. It used to be a given that a network's news division wasn't going to make much money -- the Big Three (ABC, NBC and CBS) reported anyway because of a strange marriage of journalistic integrity and network branding. The thought was that if people tuned into your nightly news program, they might stick around for Prime Time, too. In recent years, though, this model has been scrapped for a new one emphasizing cost cutting and increased national coverage (at the expense of foreign news bureaus). These seven new bureaus, while tiny in comparison to the old models, are exactly the shot in the arm that Network News needs. Foreign correspondence shouldn't be sacrificed to the bottom line; it needs be streamlined and brought into the 21st Century. Digital technology allows just that.

And it's better than the alternative: Reporting only in the "hot spots" where there is a sizable American interest (i.e., Europe, Israel, Iraq, etc.) while virtually ignoring the rest of the world -- if, for nothing else, to know something about other nations before we invade them.

Just kidding. Sort of.

Exit Stage Left

Things still aren't going well in Iraq. While I still believe that we have an obligation to the people of Iraq to clean up the mess we've made, it's time to start asking the hard questions about withdrawal. The NY Times has a piece today with five tough questions we have to answer before we can think of a staged exit. Leaving won't be pretty if things don't get better soon. A complete withdrawal will take months. Casualties will increase sharply as we fight our way out. Over 100,000 Iraqi contractors who having been working for the U.S. will either have to be evacuated and relocated, or left to fend for themselves. Billions of dollars of ammunition and fuel would have to be left behind in a quick withdrawal, further fodder for a broiling civil war. And finally, a massive withdrawal could be the greatest logistical problem the U.S. military has ever seen. No one knows how much it will cost shipping the rest of our personal and equipment back to the States in case of a swift exit. There's nothing easy about a decision to withdraw from Iraq. In fact, the President's "stay-the-course" strategy might be the easier short-term decision. Knowing him, I wouldn't expect President Bush to deal with any of these questions during the remainder of his term.

Our next president will have his/her work cut out for them.